I finished the chapter on Listlessness (Acedia) and there is something I have a question about. It was a verse that caught my eye because someone just started another thread asking about uncreated light.

I'm too lazy to type it from my Nook, so I will just copy and paste from the version that is on the website I linked earlier:

6.16. For the mind that does not believe that the [tempting-] thoughts of acedia remaining in him can disturb his state and at the time of prayer darken the holy light in his eyes.

It was about this very light that we, I and the servant of God Ammonius, wished to know whence it comes: and so we asked the holy John of the Thebaid whether the nature of the intellect is [itself] luminous and thus of itself gives off this light, or whether some other [light] from without shines upon and illuminates it.

He answered: “Human beings are not in a position to judge this; and the nous also cannot be illuminated while praying without the grace of God, once it is freed from the numerous and fearful enemies trying hard to destroy it.”

+ Ps 37:11 My heart is troubled, my strength has failed me, and the light of my eyes is not with me

Would this be what is referred to as "uncreated light?" What is he talking about?

I'm not sure it's a good idea to be reading texts that were written by monks for monks, at least for the purpose of personal application in the pursuit of spiritual development.

I know that this text seems a mere neat and handy compilation and arrangement of Scriptural texts, but even when it comes to the Scriptures, there are many layers of meaning--not only of general narratives and incidents, but even at times of a single word--and some verses simply do not apply to laity in the same way that they would for monks. The example in the OP is an obvious case in point.

This is a matter that probably ought to be raised and discussed with your spiritual instructor in my opinion.

I hope I have not offended you in any way. I intend the above in a friendly tone of gentle caution.

« Last Edit: June 10, 2011, 11:16:55 PM by EkhristosAnesti »

Logged

No longer an active member of this forum. Sincerest apologies to anyone who has taken offence to anything posted in youthful ignorance or negligence prior to my leaving this forum - October, 2012.

"Philosophy is the imitation by a man of what is better, according to what is possible" - St Severus

I'm not sure it's a good idea to be reading texts that were written by monks for monks, at least for the purpose of personal application in the pursuit of spiritual development.

I know that this text seems a mere neat and handy compilation and arrangement of Scriptural texts, but even when it comes to the Scriptures, there are many layers of meaning--not only of general narratives and incidents, but even at times of a single word--and some verses simply do not apply to laity in the same way that they would for monks. The example in the OP is an obvious case in point.

This is a matter that probably ought to be raised and discussed with your spiritual instructor in my opinion.

I hope I have not offended you in any way. I intend the above in a friendly tone of gentle caution.

Not to worry. I won't be applying too much of this to my personal spiritual development. It's a wonder that the Desert Fathers were able to live such intense lives.

I'm on the chapter on Vainglory now. That actually has a lot in it which can apply to laity as well as monks. Vainglory is something every Christian struggles with and it is something we really should not tolerate at all in ourselves.

Most of the other material, though, is way above where I am and where I ever probably will be.

If you will, you can become all flame.Extra caritatem nulla salus.In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness". सर्वभूतहितἌνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas GandhiY dduw bo'r diolch.